….or the Higgs search when it seems to suit you, using them as a "Look, look at the error in the mainstream model! Look, I'm more accurate!" but when new data comes to light which results in an altering of the data understanding which goes against you suddenly you start making excuses and it isn't so important….
… And whenever new experiments come to light which contradict you you respin your claims, referring to things like the Higgs as the "sham Higgs"….
As usually you are liar. I never “start making excuses”. I never changed my theory. It is obvious that experimentalists make many mistakes, THEY CHANGE THEIR RESULTS – I never will do it because my correct and complete theory is indeed the lacking part of ultimate theory. It concerns the phase transitions.
It is obvious that the real Higgs mechanism must lead to the Planck energy i.e. energy about 17 powers of ten times greater than the mass of the detected sham Higgs boson 125 GeV. This means that the Higgs mechanism is not DIRECTLY associated with the production of the sham Higgs boson 125 GeV. It is the reason why I refer to such boson as the sham boson.
AlphaNumeric, you proved that you completely do not understand the problems associated with the Higgs mechanism. The real Higgs mechanism shows how gravitationally massless field transforms into gravitational field. I described such mechanism. It was possible ONLY during the inflation. Today, the scalar condensates acquire their gravitational mass due to my confinement that follows from the Mexican-hat mechanism. I described such mechanism as well.
Your sentences prove that you do not understand that there must be in existence some mechanism leading to the upper limit for masses of the scalar particles. Such mechanism is described within the Everlasting Theory. Within the mainstream theories we cannot do it. You should read my papers and the most important mainstream papers. Have you time to do it?
You've shown you do not understand the mainstream enough to avoid misrepresenting it when you try to attack it, as seen in the whole conflation of asymptotic freedom and confinement I had to correct you on.
Very funny….Ha, ha, ha….Confinement….Do you remember that you were both contrary and pro? Should I cite you once more? You wrote the nonsensical posts about the confinement – I proved it.
On the other hand, you can find in my papers the description of the Mexican-hat mechanism that shows origin of the confinement and I calculated the range of the confinement for the Einstein-spacetime components – it leads, for example, to the complete mass spectrum of the sham Higgs boson 125 GeV.
You and others completely do not understand the confinement because it is directly associated with the internal structure of the Einstein-spacetime components and depends on how it interacts with the modified Higgs field – it follows directly from the phase transitions described within the Everlasting Theory that I described in 1997.
The supernova neutron star "problem" is as yet an open question. There are many phenomena within the mainstream understanding of astrophysics which could explain it, it is not like the mainstream models say "This will create a neutron star which will definitely be visible.". It may say "likely to be visible" but that's an entirely different thing and it is what is driving current observation programs. It may well turn out our understanding of supernova processes is wrong but that doesn't make you right. It's the whole "false dichotomy" thing I mentioned in my previous post, which you obviously didn't understand.
…..Funny how you jump on things like the 1987A neutron star (or lack thereof), its neutrino measurements, superluminal neutrinos at CERN
….This retro-active fitting is blatant, given how you supposedly perfectly predicted the neutrino super-luminal speeds at the LHC, only for it to be a mistake at CERN…..
The experimentalists associated with MINOS and OPERA changed their results at once after the attack. They changed the applied methods. I claim that they once more will change the conclusions. Just SOME NEUTRINOS ARE SUPERLUMINAL.
Your sentences are non-logic. You wrote something like this: The mainstream interpretation of the SN 1987A facts can be incorrect but then scientists will change it and then it will be correct whereas my interpretation never will be correct. It is beautiful hypocrisy.
I claim that some next supernova explosion will show that the time-distance between the neutrino and photon fronts is directly proportional to distance. It will prove that I am right. Then, experimentalists will correctly plan the neutrino experiments. They will select the neutrinos that appear in the weak decays inside the baryons. Such neutrinos appeared in the first MINOS and OPERA experiments. Next, there were the experiments in which the superluminal neutrinos were totally eliminated.
I never will reject from my book the Chapter concerning the superluminal neutrinos because I know that I am right. You know, the SAME FORMULA leads to the central values obtained in the first MINOS and OPERA experiments and in the supernova SN 1987A observation.
Emphasize, the same formula leads to the three central values. A coincidence? No!
You still write the untrue.
All my posts are correct. You are unable to show some mistakes so you write the nonsensical posts. My correct knowledge follows from the Everlasting Theory. It is based on following foundations.
The lacking part of ultimate theory is based on two fundamental axioms. There are the phase transitions of the fundamental spacetime composed of the superluminal and gravitationally massless pieces of space (tachyons). The phase transitions follow from the saturated interactions of the tachyons and lead to the superluminal binary systems of closed strings (entanglons) responsible for the entanglement, lead to the binary systems of neutrinos i.e. to the Einstein-spacetime components, to the cores of baryons and to the cosmic objects (protoworlds) that appeared after the era of inflation but before the observed expansion of our Universe. The second axiom follows from the symmetrical decays of bosons that appear on the surface of the spinor/core of baryons. It leads to the Titius-Bode law for the strong interactions i.e. to the atom-like structure of baryons. The two first phase transitions are associated with the Higgs mechanism that leads from the modified non-gravitational Higgs field to the Principle of Equivalence and the initial conditions applied in the General Theory of Relativity (GR). The three first phase transitions concern the particle physics whereas the structure and evolution of the most sophisticated spinor, i.e. the cosmic spinor/object, defined by the four phase transitions leads to the new cosmology.
The mainstream QCD has one fundamental weak point that suggests that this theory is partially incorrect. Just since 1964 scientists cannot calculate the fundamental masses, i.e. masses of proton and neutron, from initial conditions. Why? The Everlasting Theory shows that the mainstream QCD is totally wrong at very low energies. And it will be forever if scientists will neglect the lacking part of ultimate theory i.e. the phase transitions described within the Everlasting Theory.
The proof is always just around the corner with you. And when we go around the corner and the evidence is against you you make excuses. Suddenly the "everlasting theory" gets a modification...
You were and you are big liar. I never modified my theory. The succeeding papers (the book plus the 18 papers) follow from the phase transitions of the modified Higgs field (the Newtonian spacetime) that is in my short book published in 1997. I never make excuses because my theory is indeed the lacking part of ultimate theory.
You once more proved that you are dishonest and you are liar. I have no time for nonsensical discussion. If you still will write the nonsensical posts then I will cite once more and once more what you wrote about confinement, asymptotic freedom and so on. Then once more all will see who is a dunce. You know, many PhD are dunces. They have no time to read the important articles. You proved many times that you as well have no time to read such articles.
You are a permanent liar so you should be banned. You write the stupid sentences without any justifications. You cannot prove that you are right. Can you?
AlphaNumeric, your posts are such messy as a few mainstream theories, for example, the QCD at very low energy i.e. the quarks up…down, up….down, up….down and it will be the end i.e. the “down”. It is incredible that they do not change the QCD within which we cannot calculate fundamental masses from the initial conditions. The needed changes you can find in my theory – just the phase transitions.
